Moore, T; Ahiaga-Dagbui, D; Shrestha, A and Debnath, A (2022) Risk allocation on transport megaprojects: A case for an institutional theory lens. In: Tutesigensi, A and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 38th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2022, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
Abstract
This paper explores institutional theory as a novel lens to examine the praxis of risk allocation on transport megaprojects. A case study of Australia's largest transport megaproject, Suburban Rail Loop Project, has been conducted using institutional theory to provide a better understanding of the dynamics and decision-making process in relation to risk allocation on megaprojects. The research findings identify how institutional instruments were used to shape the front-end of a transport megaproject and allocate risk. An example is the creation of a new and dedicated Minister for the Suburban Rail Loop Project, resulting in the approval powers to streamline and sometimes fast-track the decision-making processes. This paper contributes to the extant knowledge of megaproject management by providing a novel perspective on the praxis of risk allocation on transport megaprojects through the lens of institutional theory.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | front-end; institutional theory; risk allocation; transport megaprojects |
| Index terms: | dynamics, megaproject, approval, Australia, case study, praxis, institutional theory, risk allocation, decision-making process |
| Subjects: | financial risk, systems engineering, reflexivity, strategic project management, decision analysis, contractual role, sociology, Geography, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Risk Management, Engineering Principles, Project Management, Cost Management, Contract Administration, Geographical Context, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here